[Advaita-l] Some thoughts on the nature of bliss

[H S Chandramouli]

Considering the context, perhaps "antaryamin" would be a more appropriate
term than "Iswara".

Regards

On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 3:49 PM, H S Chandramouli <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Pranams Sri sadananda Ji,
>
>
>
> Reg  << In my original post some time back,  I was referring to Sloka 35
> of Ch. 14 of Panchadashi - where there appears to be indication of the
> visyayaananda too through bodies. One explanation is as witnessing agent he
> witnesses all the anandas of all jeevas - in that case he also should also
> witness the sufferings of all jeevas - that was the point raised.>>,
>
>
>
> Sloka 35 pertains to a Jnani who has concentrated his mind on Brahman. He
> is then “enjoying” the svarupaananda as Brahman. But since the context here
> is happiness experienced by different jivas from a sovereign upto
> Hiranyagarbha vis-à-vis that experienced by a jnani, instead of
> svarupananda, the jnani is depicted as “enjoying” omniscience as Iswara.
> That is how I would understand this verse.
>
>
>
> Reg  << Venkatraghavanji says vishayaandanda of jnaani is only figurative
> statement. His swaruuapaanada being akhanDam, it only dribbles down as
> vishyaanandas when there is saatvic vRittis.>>,
>
>
>
> I am not sure in what context he has made that statement. But as I said in
> my earlier post, a jnani does experience joy/sorrow just like any of us
> when he is not concentrating on Brahman and has diverted his attention to
> jagat.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 9:03 PM, kuntimaddi sadananda <
> kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Chandramouliji - PraNAms
>>
>> For some reason my posts are not going through the list. Hence including
>> the individual mails as welld.
>>
>>
>> We are all agree that jnaanam involves aham brahmaasmi as a fact, and
>> therefore ananda is his swaruupa lakshanam as Brahman.  We also know that
>> this happiness is not of the triad type.
>>
>> In my original post some time back,  I was referring to Sloka 35 of Ch.
>> 14 of Panchadashi - where there appears to be indication of the
>> visyayaananda too through bodies. One explanation is as witnessing agent he
>> witnesses all the anandas of all jeevas - in that case he also should also
>> witness the sufferings of all jeevas - that was the point raised.
>>
>> Venkatraghavanji says vishayaandanda of jnaani is only figurative
>> statement. His swaruuapaanada being akhanDam, it only dribbles down as
>> vishyaanandas when there is saatvic vRittis.
>>
>> In the 15th Ch. vidyarnya further clarifies that that duHKam comes due to
>> rajasic and tamasic vRitties, the ananda gets covered and swruupaanda of
>> Brahman does not show up even if it is there.
>>
>> Hari Om!
>> Sadananda
>>
>>
>